ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Hot-cold water sound perception and auditory-thermal discrimination.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine whether individuals can discriminate the temperature state of water using auditory cues alone and to identify the acoustic, perceptual, and neurocognitive factors associated with this ability. Sixty-three volunteers aged 18-25 years with normal hearing participated. Participants were presented with prerecorded sounds of hot and cold water being poured into four types of cups (glass, plastic, paper, porcelain) and completed discrimination and matching tasks while auditory processing and event-related potential measures were obtained. Results from Spectral-Temporally Modulated Ripple Test (SMRT), Frequency Pattern Test (FPT), and P300 recordings were collected. Significant SMRT differences (p < 0.05) were observed among participants who correctly identified temperature differences in porcelain cup stimuli. For paper cup stimuli, P300 amplitudes (p < 0.05) and FPT scores (p < 0.05) differed significantly between correct and incorrect responders. Gender significantly influenced performance with glass cup stimuli and in participants who described acoustic features (frequency, intensity, duration) for porcelain stimuli (p < 0.05). Despite normal audiological findings, individuals exhibited notable variability in perceiving the same acoustic stimuli. Auditory-thermal discrimination appears to rely on higher-order auditory processing and neurocognitive mechanisms rather than basic auditory sensitivity. This is the first study to link auditory‑thermal discrimination with SMRT/FPT and P300 measures in normal‑hearing young adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42026346What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.